[LAU] Audio Distribution Proposal...

[Thomas Fisher]

On Wednesday 03 June 2009 03:09:32 pm jrogers wrote:
> > Message: 28
> > Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 09:54:22 +0300
> > From: Asmo Koskinen <asmo.koskinen at arkki.info>
> > Subject: Re: [LAU] ubuntu realtime.
>
> I did not take quotes from the following link because the whole thing
> deserves a (re)read
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-users/2009-April/004507.htm
>l
>
> This bummed be out so I had to quote this:
> > Almost down for the count, Cory K.
>
> The note was a plea for help so I would like to see what we can do.
>
> There are so many things to discuss and so many possible directions to go
> in
 Just thinking about it can be overwhelming

>
> Free (not free beer, but “freedom”) is wonderful, but it ironically can be
> more paralyzing than “confinement”, so let me start with a simple and self
> limiting proposal:
>
> I tried to write this list a few times, and every time it got too long and
> complicated. At the risk of being flamed here is my “simple” list:
>
> - Manual install (like arch Linux) is fine and probably preferred. (manual
> is fine, but complete default instructions would be needed)
> - specific hardware (i.e. motherboard, video card and audio interface) is
> fine - most/all of the “popular” audio apps with a kernel that combined to
> create a system that was extremely stable and had reasonable latency (less
> than 10ms? Or maybe less than 7ms? What ever can be done with reasonable
> and reliable settings?)
> - I would donate at least $100 per year (If a thousand people joined me
> that would be $100K
 Could one person full time, or several people
> part-time sign up for that?
> - I would donate a few years in advance
 say three years
 (If this would
> help someone/some-few decide to do this)
> - I would also help out. This assumes the individual or small core team
> would dedicate sufficient time to partition the tasks in a way that would
> facilitate widespread involvement.
>
> Questions:
>
> Ignoring resources (money, people, etc) is it reasonable to build and
> maintain such a distribution?
>
> Is $100k per year enough? If not how much is needed?
>
> Are 1000 users at $100 reasonable to expect? How about 2000 at $50? Or 500
> at $200 (I would consider donating $200/year) Strike that
 If this existed
> today I would donate $200.
>
>
> I know that the conventional wisdom is that Linux audio is not for “new
> Linux users” but I think that is the root of the “chicken/egg” problem that
> we have here. A predictable, stable, reliable audio distribution may
> generate the support that the particular distribution (and Linux audio in
> general) needs to get to the next level.
>
> Can we “prime this pump” with a conservative but very useful distribution?
>
===============================================
  I am at best a wannbe audiophile with graphics and cine schemes. Linux 
capable but not any guru. I have attended the LAU, UbuntuStudio, CCRMA lists 
for several years. I have run Linux versions ranging from Slackware, Redhat { 
several releases }, Fedora, Debian { a couple of releases }, Ubuntu { several 
releases }. I have marveled at the social phenomena of Linux, GNU, and open 
source software and have witnessed a couple of beached whales.
  Debian's philosophy is stability and reliability. Ubuntu is more "bleeding 
edge" and runs by the clock to have a rap prior to the chime for when the 
next new release is due. Unfortunately Ubuntu Studio seems to be driven by 
the same chime but with more stringent goals to meet, one of which is 
this "realtime" dilemma, especially where there does not seem to be a real 
kernel guru on the team.  Add the pulseaudio mess, uncertainties of major 
audio packages, positionalities of personalities, and etcetera the resultant 
chaos becomes certain. Consequently major efforts such as cinelerra have to 
be sidelined.
  I suspect the first design flaw is pandering to the clock. Another problem 
is the information curve was being ignored in UbuntuStudio to help the new to 
fully comprehend what UbuntuStudio is technically so more would have stepped 
forward to contribute to the development effort. From what I observed,  
UbuntuStudio could have drawn more from the LAU & LAD knowledge base. Just 
exactly how, I do not know, other than I suspect a lot of missed 
opportunities were possible.  Meanwhile I am certain Gates and crew are 
having a chuckle.
  So before we throw dollars at it I suspect a well thought out analysis would 
be in order.
Hope this is of use.
Tom